No Webber is not a match for Vettel. He is very talented but Vettel is better. But the real difference is in commitment - Webber lags significantly behind in this department. He can be great when motivated but too often seems to wander off.

they will be able to drive it alright, but when the difference from 1-10 in Q2 is 0.3s (Chinese GP for example) a driver with a good car suited to him will most likely make the cut while if his teammate doesn't get the car to his liking won't.

I think we may have to agree to disagree on this one

Can you think of an example of a design element that can be made to suit one over another? PM me if you want, its not strictly relevant to the thread topic I guess.

Blown Diffuser...

Vettel is simply more comfortable at steering the car with thew throttle than Webber who prefers a neutral car that has excellent handling. This has been the major difference between them (outside of Marks dismal starts - likely due to him being used to the launch control systems in the first half of his career is what I think) and when they had the Double Diffuser that simply added more downforce to the car to finally balance out the handling, Mark was edging Seb… Right up until Seb sashed into Mark and ruined his best chance at the championship to date. At that point Mark was ahead by a good margin but Red Bull inexplicably didn't reprimand Vettel for blatantly disregarding team orders.

The following year the EBD came in and it was clear Vettel REALLY took a fancy to it and it complimented his driving style where as for Mark it doesn't feel quite right. It's a tough thing mentally to accelerate in order to help turn a car that already feels like it's on the edge and Mark can't seem to commit to it every time. Seb on the other hand is much more comfortable doing so because it feels natural to him and this year early on, Mark was edging Seb because the Exhaust blowing was banned and he could no longer use the same technique to help steer the car under acceleration. However once the new Diffuser was introduced, it once again allowed the drivers to help steer the car with the throttle and THAt is when Seb came back to top form. While teams don't build cars specifically around a particular driver, once the base designs full potential is realized and the drivers can do nothing more, the engineers work alongside the drivers to make changes and develop upgrades to suit their drivers' tastes and when something is found to be quicker, they usually apply it to both cars even if it doesn't particularly suit the other driver. The thinking behind this practice is that they expect a driver CAN adapt to it to learn how to use it to reduce lap times but as with everyone in the word, some things just don't suit everyone the same.

While Ashley is right, the development of the cars can and often do lean towards one driver over the other but there are certain things each driver can have on their cars that are specific to their tastes to aide in customizing the cars to suit their tastes such as Brake systems. Some prefer Carbon Industry Brakes, others Hitco and others Brembo. Steering systems can also customized a little to help improve the level of comfort of the driver.

I'm not saying this is wrong, but several recent posts in a couple of threads got me thinking. Forgive me Lunatic, I'm not calling you out specifically but wanted to tie in my response with this line of thinking.

Many say that a car (not just Red Bull) is designed around a particular driver. As in: "Driver 1 isn't going fast enough so we're going to design it to make Driver 1 faster, no matter what happens to Driver 2." I think there is more to it than that. I'll use RBR and their two drivers as an example:

Let's say that a perfect laptime for the base car (RB8) is 1:30:00.

If the engineers decide to make a change (RB8 version B) that suits Webber , he might run a 1:29:50 compared to Vettel's 1:29:70. Webber is faster than his teammate by 2 tenths, and 5 tenths faster than the base car.

If the engineers make a different change (RB8 version C) that suits Vettel, he might run a 1:29:00 versus Webber's 1:29:20. Vettel is 2 tenths faster than his teammate, and more importantly 1 full second faster than the base car.

Why would the team choose to use the slower overall option? All other things being equal (reliability, etc), if they are chasing faster cars at the beginning of the season, why would they not choose the setup (RB8-C) that made their car 1 second a lap faster in one of their driver's hands? Overall both their cars are faster, so they are thinking as constructors, yes?

I'm not saying this is wrong, but several recent posts in a couple of threads got me thinking. Forgive me Lunatic, I'm not calling you out specifically but wanted to tie in my response with this line of thinking.

Many say that a car (not just Red Bull) is designed around a particular driver. As in: "Driver 1 isn't going fast enough so we're going to design it to make Driver 1 faster, no matter what happens to Driver 2." I think there is more to it than that. I'll use RBR and their two drivers as an example:

Let's say that a perfect laptime for the base car (RB8) is 1:30:00.

If the engineers decide to make a change (RB8 version B) that suits Webber , he might run a 1:29:50 compared to Vettel's 1:29:70. Webber is faster than his teammate by 2 tenths, and 5 tenths faster than the base car.

If the engineers make a different change (RB8 version C) that suits Vettel, he might run a 1:29:00 versus Webber's 1:29:20. Vettel is 2 tenths faster than his teammate, and more importantly 1 full second faster than the base car.

Why would the team choose to use the slower overall option? All other things being equal (reliability, etc), if they are chasing faster cars at the beginning of the season, why would they not choose the setup (RB8-C) that made their car 1 second a lap faster in one of their driver's hands? Overall both their cars are faster, so they are thinking as constructors, yes?

They would go for the RB8-C IMO going by that logic. When you think about it, the car for Red Bull will always be head towards Vettel's direction because that's where Red Bull will get most of their downforce - the blown diffuser - which in turn will always favor Vettel due to his driving style. CH has said multiple times before a season they will build the car around Vettel but that's not unexpected.

The problem with Webber as I mentioned in another thread is that even though he was a match for Vettel in qualifying this year, his problem is consistency on Sundays and this has always been his problem. If he fixes this, he will be a genuine title contender each year. He is always be behind because:

a) poor startsb) tilke tracksc) reliability problems throughout the weekend (how many times do you hear the radio, mark you have no kers)d) poor strategye) webber's driving style being harder on the tiresf) just a general lack of pace

IMO Webber is a better driving during the re-fueling/Bridgestone era. He was just unlucky because:

a) the change in regulations didn't suit himb) he had a faster team-mate in all the years he has been in f1

When you think about it, opinions would be completely different if Webber won the WDC in 2010 and ended up retiring while Vettel went on to win 2 WDCs afterwards. Webber's legacy could be an awesome WDC but now it's more considered a #2 in terms of Massa/Rubens (though I reckon Webber is faster than both). How times change...

I'm not saying this is wrong, but several recent posts in a couple of threads got me thinking. Forgive me Lunatic, I'm not calling you out specifically but wanted to tie in my response with this line of thinking.

Many say that a car (not just Red Bull) is designed around a particular driver. As in: "Driver 1 isn't going fast enough so we're going to design it to make Driver 1 faster, no matter what happens to Driver 2." I think there is more to it than that. I'll use RBR and their two drivers as an example:

Let's say that a perfect laptime for the base car (RB8) is 1:30:00.

If the engineers decide to make a change (RB8 version B) that suits Webber , he might run a 1:29:50 compared to Vettel's 1:29:70. Webber is faster than his teammate by 2 tenths, and 5 tenths faster than the base car.

If the engineers make a different change (RB8 version C) that suits Vettel, he might run a 1:29:00 versus Webber's 1:29:20. Vettel is 2 tenths faster than his teammate, and more importantly 1 full second faster than the base car.

Why would the team choose to use the slower overall option? All other things being equal (reliability, etc), if they are chasing faster cars at the beginning of the season, why would they not choose the setup (RB8-C) that made their car 1 second a lap faster in one of their driver's hands? Overall both their cars are faster, so they are thinking as constructors, yes?

I think the debate is whether versions B and C are actual design changes which intentionally suit one particular driver, or setup changes which either driver's engineers may apply to the base car. Some think that teams actively follow the first option, whereas others are saying that cars aren't designed for any particular driver, but it's how they set them up that make the difference, i.e. the second option

Straight away - cars are not developed toward a particular driver's style, they are developed to be as fast and efficient as they can be. Tailoring for a style of driving in this day and age is a myth.

Ashley over and over and over again you always claim cars cannot be built to favour a driver and not sure why. You defend Vettel to the death even if it means making up false facts. Christian Horner from Redbull himself admitted the car is designed around Vettel yet you somehow know more than he does on this topic and keep claiming no car can be built around a driver.

Straight away - cars are not developed toward a particular driver's style, they are developed to be as fast and efficient as they can be. Tailoring for a style of driving in this day and age is a myth.

Ashley over and over and over again you always claim cars cannot be built to favour a driver and not sure why. You defend Vettel to the death even if it means making up false facts. Christian Horner from Redbull himself admitted the car is designed around Vettel yet you somehow know more than he does on this topic and keep claiming no car can be built around a driver.

Straight away - cars are not developed toward a particular driver's style, they are developed to be as fast and efficient as they can be. Tailoring for a style of driving in this day and age is a myth.

Ashley over and over and over again you always claim cars cannot be built to favour a driver and not sure why. You defend Vettel to the death even if it means making up false facts. Christian Horner from Redbull himself admitted the car is designed around Vettel yet you somehow know more than he does on this topic and keep claiming no car can be built around a driver.

I'm also getting tires of this girl and her false claims. it is a known fact the car was build around him and Vettel is the team favourite. Beginning of the year Vettel was nowhere and Webber beat him msot of the time. Funny its always Mark who's Kers system is failing.

I think after three seasons of being outclassed by Vettel, he is not and never will be world championship material. He has qualified decently but his starts are rarely good, when he is good he is really good but often he is nowhere compared to his teammate and although he had two wins last season, in some races he was embarasingly bad like in Spain where he was outside the top ten. And to be sixth overall when your teammate is champion is not on. I think he should have gone to Ferrari to have a fresh start when a deal was on the table, because Red Bull arent going to give him a chance of the title and he knows it.

I'm not saying this is wrong, but several recent posts in a couple of threads got me thinking. Forgive me Lunatic, I'm not calling you out specifically but wanted to tie in my response with this line of thinking.

Many say that a car (not just Red Bull) is designed around a particular driver. As in: "Driver 1 isn't going fast enough so we're going to design it to make Driver 1 faster, no matter what happens to Driver 2." I think there is more to it than that. I'll use RBR and their two drivers as an example:

Let's say that a perfect laptime for the base car (RB8) is 1:30:00.

If the engineers decide to make a change (RB8 version B) that suits Webber , he might run a 1:29:50 compared to Vettel's 1:29:70. Webber is faster than his teammate by 2 tenths, and 5 tenths faster than the base car.

If the engineers make a different change (RB8 version C) that suits Vettel, he might run a 1:29:00 versus Webber's 1:29:20. Vettel is 2 tenths faster than his teammate, and more importantly 1 full second faster than the base car.

Why would the team choose to use the slower overall option? All other things being equal (reliability, etc), if they are chasing faster cars at the beginning of the season, why would they not choose the setup (RB8-C) that made their car 1 second a lap faster in one of their driver's hands? Overall both their cars are faster, so they are thinking as constructors, yes?

I think the debate is whether versions B and C are actual design changes which intentionally suit one particular driver, or setup changes which either driver's engineers may apply to the base car. Some think that teams actively follow the first option, whereas others are saying that cars aren't designed for any particular driver, but it's how they set them up that make the difference, i.e. the second option

I suppose in my example it doesn't matter whether it's fundamental design changes or setup changes. I assume they can run simulations based on those design changes. If they run it one way with the design pointed toward Vettel's driving style and it's the faster overall package than one pointed toward Webber's, why wouldn't they choose the faster design? I know I'm over simplifying things, but I would tell Webber "I know it's not your favorite Mark, but you're actually going faster than if we designed it toward you. We have to choose the package which catches us up to McLaren."

I agree, with a bit more consistency and a further of his start line improvements this year 2013 could be golden.

probably better to go out and do it than talk about it.... Reality is that for 3 years he has had it handed to him. I know many like to point to '10 as close but had Vettel not had so many car problems it would not have been so close.

There are times when Webber shines, just like times when Button and Massa shine, but doubtful any one down the grid would put him on the level with Vettel

I like Mark a lot. Always have. Was so incredibly bummed to watch it all slip away from him in 2010.

With that said, in regards to the race starts... how can it be anything OTHER than him at this point? It's almost like Barrichello now.

Both cars from a team are capable of launching nearly identically (considering the same heat in the tires, gear ratios are going to be the same for the most part - especially 1st - the engines are of identical design, and they are on the same fuel loads and thus car weights). It's not like the drivers use KERS through 1st and 2nd gear at all, so that's not even an issue. If you watch any other team, both drivers get the cars away great, well, or average with slight variation race to race. Sometimes Jenson will have a better start than Hamilton, and other times he won't but the consistency is there that they both start well. And look at Ferrari for the past decade excluding Barrichello. All four full-time drivers had great getaways consistently. Kimi struggled at first but got it under control.

Point being, Mark's had way too long in this sport, and at one team (which has one of the cars start great consistently) to not have the car set up to launch really well. If HIS engineer can't figure it out, Red Bull would have had Seb's engineer or other engineers look into it to get the issue sorted out. I think it's simply Mark just can't come to grips with the clutch "paddle", and for once Red Bull is actually covering for him by saying they can't figure it out, but don't blame him.

they will be able to drive it alright, but when the difference from 1-10 in Q2 is 0.3s (Chinese GP for example) a driver with a good car suited to him will most likely make the cut while if his teammate doesn't get the car to his liking won't.

I think we may have to agree to disagree on this one

Can you think of an example of a design element that can be made to suit one over another? PM me if you want, its not strictly relevant to the thread topic I guess.

Blown Diffuser...

I think Webber had a harder time with the tires, rather than the blown diffuser. I find it hard to believe drivers having a hard time when they get more grip from something like EBD

Straight away - cars are not developed toward a particular driver's style, they are developed to be as fast and efficient as they can be. Tailoring for a style of driving in this day and age is a myth.

Ashley over and over and over again you always claim cars cannot be built to favour a driver and not sure why. You defend Vettel to the death even if it means making up false facts. Christian Horner from Redbull himself admitted the car is designed around Vettel yet you somehow know more than he does on this topic and keep claiming no car can be built around a driver.

I'm also getting tires of this girl and her false claims. it is a known fact the car was build around him and Vettel is the team favourite. Beginning of the year Vettel was nowhere and Webber beat him msot of the time. Funny its always Mark who's Kers system is failing.

So you both missed the part where Horner says Webber has a similar driving style?

Guess you just want to believe his style is the exact opposite of Vettel's at all costs.

_________________"No, there is no terrible way to win. There is only winning."Jean-Pierre Sarti

Straight away - cars are not developed toward a particular driver's style, they are developed to be as fast and efficient as they can be. Tailoring for a style of driving in this day and age is a myth.

Doesn't ever specifically say "I'm a match for Vettel". If you were a journalist, sensationalism would be your area!

What he's saying is that he was able to keep up with Vettel in qualifying in 2012 and he's happy with that - and wouldn't you? The guy that is regarded as the best qualifier on the grid only just beat you. It's got to be a confidence boost for Mark after the enormous qualifying deficit in 2011.

What I don't get is how he says it's 11-10 in qualifying when there are only 20 GPs?

Anyway, I have it 9-9 when both cars are operational, he's already on par with Vettel in quali.

The difference tends to come in race strategy where RBR frequently get Webber's wrong while frequently get Vettel's right (probably to keep them away from one another), and car reliability where Webber always seems to managing a problem, getting gearbox penalties and what have you.

I don't believe he'll ever beat Vettel at RB, quite simply because the team don't want him to, the German Vettel is the Austrian Red Bull owner Dieter Mateschitz and Helmut Marko's man. Christian Horner does as they wish to keep his job.

I think after three seasons of being outclassed by Vettel, he is not and never will be world championship material. He has qualified decently but his starts are rarely good, when he is good he is really good but often he is nowhere compared to his teammate and although he had two wins last season, in some races he was embarasingly bad.

My thoughts exactly. The highlighted bits describe Webber in a nutshell. Very talented but does not have the cutting edge to be a champion. When drivers like Hakkinen, Alonso, Raikkonen, Vettel etc came into F1, there was this feeling that those drivers would be WDCs sooner or later. Webber lacks that aura, and in that sense he is a bit like David Coulthrad; can win races on his day but does not have the consistency to make a champion.

I'm also getting tires of this girl and her false claims. it is a known fact the car was build around him and Vettel is the team favourite. Beginning of the year Vettel was nowhere and Webber beat him msot of the time. Funny its always Mark who's Kers system is failing.

So EBD had nothing to do with the difference in performance between Vettel and Webber??

Then I'd like an explanation from a Vettel fan as to why Webber outdrove Vettel so frequently in early 2012..

Perhaps Mark is a quicker learner of a new car? Maybe he has an ability to drive around problems more than Sebastian? If so, it would be very interesting if they were both still racing together at the same team in 2014...with the biggest overhaul of the regs in years, I wonder who would be quickest out of the box??

As for Webber having "too many years" in F1...well, 6 championships later, I think RBR are quite happy with the job he's done over the past 3 years.

Perhaps he is a match but in something else than F1, because Vettel is destroying him from the day one in RBR. Occasional good race where Webber is unbeatable are just that, too rare to be taken seriously.

Nothing too controversial there. He has shown that he can be a match for Vettel on his good day, but he has not shown that when the pressure is on. Furthermore, he has shown that he lacks what it takes to get the job done when everything is on the table.

Heck, on the other hand, Massa was more than a handful for Alonso in the final part of the season, when all of Ferrari's efforts were around their #5 car... Yet, I doubt anyone would even take Felipe seriously if he were to come with a statement like that.

Clearly Webber outdrove Sebastian for the entire first half of the year, the points table said so.

So now the points table is the be all end all statistic for showing the better driver?

Rubbish. The points table doesn't reflect the fact Seb should and would have scored a dominant win in Valencia, which would have made him the first repeat winner.

That's one case. There are more. Vettel generally had better race pace than Webber and beat him in most of the races in the first half of the season.

edit: also, Australia? How can you claim Vettel was ahead of Webber "only" because he got a superior strategy, when Webber was already 8 seconds down on Vettel before the first pit stop?Is it because Webber had to run S-M-M where Vettel ran S-S-M? Well, since Webbers soft tyres were going off starting from lap 10 onwards, where Vettel kept his tyres together, that might actually have been a good choice. Also, both front runners had S-M-M strategies.

It's not uncommon for teams to split strategies, and in this case it wasn't that big a difference. However, whe don't hear you talking about Canada where Vettel clearly got the wrong strategy and Webber got the right one. It, however, didn't keep Vettel from finishing in front of his team mate. He was just better on track.

_________________Supporting all drivers with surnames starting with "V".

Proud member of the "It's Toro Rosso, not Torro Rosso" action committee.

The only place its a "known fact" that a car was built around anybody is on internet forums where three people who don't know a monkey seat from a snow plow say "well i THINK xyz happened because of this, that, and the other thing" and its taken by those who don't know the difference as truth rather than conjecture. This is why I'm only willing to have technical discussions with people who have demonstrated an education or experienced background in such subjects, and via PM lol. If you honestly believe this "known fact" that RB's 6-8 and presumably 9 were and are built for one driver over the other, please do provide some examples of items on the car that prove this. Be sure to include at which race is was tested, when it was raced, what other new parts were introduced at the same time, what its primary function was, what other functions it might have had, how it helped one driver based on his style (make sure you explain what that style is, with examples), and how it disadvantaged the other, then we can discuss that notion. Feel free to cite overall design philosophies in conjunction with the bits that exemplify them. Inbox is ready and waiting. I can't wait to hear how the car built for one driver earned just one less fastest lap in the last four years than for the other.

Save your breath on the blown diffuser. There is not a driver on the Formula 1 grid who will say they don't benefit from a significant increase in rear downforce and stability. If you plan to argue that point, plan also to discuss your vast experience behind the wheel of or engineering racing cars.

On the subject of strategy decisions for Mark - please please please make sure you are absorbing all available info about whats happening in the race, or happened as some times you can only get it afterward from quotes, before you crucify the team for giving him a "worse" strategy. Watch the patterns in the lap times over a stint, watch the gaps in traffic and WHO that traffic is, etc. Its usually pretty clear that the best option was chosen. Unfortunately what other people do in the race can affect the fruitfulness of that choice, and so can a driver's failure to execute his end of the bargain.

Lastly - I swear to god the first time I see someone say "well the car was built for Lewis before he left" when Jenson has a bad weekend next year I will actually vomit on my keyboard.

I freely admit I don't have a technical background and rely on others to fill in the gaps on areas I don't understand. I also absolutely don't believe in conspiracy theories and don't for one second believe a team would deliberately sabotage one of it's drivers behind the scenes just to make the other look better (I'm not talking team orders here, which are a different and as far as I am concerned inevitable part of a team sport). If driver A beats driver B, it's generally because driver A was better on the day (barring mechanical issues or other kamikaze drivers).

However, the fact that Christian Horner has openly said that car development would be tailored to Vettel (see link above) surely puts paid to the notion that that doesn't happen? If one team can do it, then others must be able to, too?

I freely admit I don't have a technical background and rely on others to fill in the gaps on areas I don't understand. I also absolutely don't believe in conspiracy theories and don't for one second believe a team would deliberately sabotage one of it's drivers behind the scenes just to make the other look better (I'm not talking team orders here, which are a different and as far as I am concerned inevitable part of a team sport). If driver A beats driver B, it's generally because driver A was better on the day (barring mechanical issues or other kamikaze drivers).

However, the fact that Christian Horner has openly said that car development would be tailored to Vettel (see link above) surely puts paid to the notion that that doesn't happen? If one team can do it, then others must be able to, too?

I'm highly cautious of a quote reported by a German tabloid with 200k readers that is translated and made into a headline by one motorsport journalist and picked up and copied by a bunch of others, none of which come from any of the big name motorsport media outlets. Further, Christian's quote, as published in that German tabloid as part of a full interview with a headline about how bad Seb's jokes are, is that HIS (SV) car will be developed to suit his style. To me that sounds more like doing set up work, and his bit about drivers influencing the design of a car is the same everywhere - they all give feedback and wants and dislikes during the process. It was also betwixt comments about giving the drivers equal treatment until one has a significant lead in the WDC, and that that wasn't the case yet at that time.

(Also, is this the ONE time everybody here ISN'T going to say Christian is always spouting nonsense? )

I'm highly cautious of a quote reported by a German tabloid with 200k readers that is translated and made into a headline by one motorsport journalist and picked up and copied by a bunch of others, none of which come from any of the big name motorsport media outlets. Further, Christian's quote, as published in that German tabloid as part of a full interview with a headline about how bad Seb's jokes are, is that HIS (SV) car will be developed to suit his style. To me that sounds more like doing set up work, and his bit about drivers influencing the design of a car is the same everywhere - they all give feedback and wants and dislikes during the process. It was also betwixt comments about giving the drivers equal treatment until one has a significant lead in the WDC, and that that wasn't the case yet at that time.

(Also, is this the ONE time everybody here ISN'T going to say Christian is always spouting nonsense? )

#

They said it on the beeb too ash. That was in full English. Newey and Horner saying the 2011 car was being built around Seb. One of the reasons being that Webber was slow to sign on the dotted line, so Newey started with what he knew was a given. Sebs body. The other was that Seb was basically #1 driver from winning the WDC onwards.

Also it's not all about getting the extra rear end grip but how it is gained.

For the EBD It was all about how the driver used the throttle which blew the diffuser.

I'm highly cautious of a quote reported by a German tabloid with 200k readers that is translated and made into a headline by one motorsport journalist and picked up and copied by a bunch of others, none of which come from any of the big name motorsport media outlets. Further, Christian's quote, as published in that German tabloid as part of a full interview with a headline about how bad Seb's jokes are, is that HIS (SV) car will be developed to suit his style. To me that sounds more like doing set up work, and his bit about drivers influencing the design of a car is the same everywhere - they all give feedback and wants and dislikes during the process. It was also betwixt comments about giving the drivers equal treatment until one has a significant lead in the WDC, and that that wasn't the case yet at that time.

(Also, is this the ONE time everybody here ISN'T going to say Christian is always spouting nonsense? )

#

They said it on the beeb too ash. That was in full English. Newey and Horner saying the 2011 car was being built around Seb. One of the reasons being that Webber was slow to sign on the dotted line, so Newey started with what he knew was a given. Sebs body. The other was that Seb was basically #1 driver from winning the WDC onwards.

Also it's not all about getting the extra rear end grip but how it is gained.

For the EBD It was all about how the driver used the throttle which blew the diffuser.

Basically having no EBD or similar, Vettel is very good driver, having EBD or similar he is the unholy lord of fairy cakes fast.

Clearly Webber outdrove Sebastian for the entire first half of the year, the points table said so.

So now the points table is the be all end all statistic for showing the better driver?

Does this get the prize for most outrageous forum post of the year? After everyone saying "Vettel won the championship the last 3 years, where was Webber?" you're now going to say that the points don't matter? Ridiculous.

Exactly half way through the season:Vettel: 105 pointsWebber: 120pts

Webber outscored Vettel by 15pts despite the fact that at that time, the Races stats between them were 5-5.

_________________This is where the party's at.Webber.Button.Ricciardo.Grosjean.Hulkenberg.Lowndes.Power.Marquez.